2016: Obama’s America

As a polemical documentary, Dinesh D’Souza’s 2016: Obama’s America has guile, snarkiness, and a kind of sneaky, nimble ambition.

Beautifully filmed and obviously quite generously funded, produced by a mover-and-shaker of typically ultra-liberal Hollywood (though of course I shouldn’t speculate on the possible ethnicity of Mormon movie mogul Gerald Molen, listed on the poster as “one of the producers of Schindler’s List, because such musings would be HIGHLY offensive and would render me the journalistic equivalent of Josef Mengele, so of course I will refrain), 2016 wants to be pass itself off as a humanely sympathetic yet deeply critical assessment of the present president. Finally, however, it reveals its true colors as an avidly alarmist and apocalyptic vision of what will surely happen to America if the Mulatto Messiah manages to get himself re-elected in November.

Eschewing Michael Moore-style confrontation and prickly bluster for bland patter and contrivedly stale interviews, all the while unfolding at a leisurely, meandering pace, 2016 aims to lull the viewer into not noticing just what a rich slab of red meat it truly is. It is National Enquirer dressed up as National Review; luridness in the guise of sobriety. In other words, 2016 is more interesting than it first appears to be, though not, in the final analysis, terribly persuasive in its conclusions.

D’Souza, a nerdish, wonkish, bespectacled intellectual, is from the start eager to ingratiate himself with his enemy, so that we know it’s nothing personal. He and Obama, it turns out, share many things in common, which D’Souza enumerates: both men were born in 1961; both are of mixed-race heritage (though D’Souza, an India-born Catholic, doesn’t reveal the precise miscegenated ambiguity of his own apparently scrambled genes); both excelled academically and wound up at Ivy League colleges (Obama at Harvard; D’Souza at Dartmouth); finally, both lived in the Third World for much of their youth (Obama spent several years in Indonesia as a boy) and thus came to form a view of European imperialism, with a certain sympathetic regard for the colonized.

D’Souza shows absolutely no interest in the “birther” controversy, accepting that Obama was indeed born on U.S. soil. Still, while Obama may technically be an American citizen, D’Souza asserts that the man’s ideology is foreign and dangerous in ways that set him apart from any prior American president. In fact, the 44th Commander-in-Chief is at bottom a hard-left anti-American, just like the long-lost father whom he strives at all costs to emulate.

* * *

Of course, Barack Jr. never really knew Barack Sr., as the former (or more probably, his ghost-writer) poignantly records in the autobiography Dreams from My Father. D’Souza liberally quotes Obama reading from the book, and through only minimal reading between the lines, we can easily discern that the prez has some lingering daddy issues. But then nearly anyone would, given the circumstances of his childhood.

For those who don’t already know, Obama’s very black African dad met his very white American mom Ann Dunham when both were enrolled at the University of Hawaii in 1960. Barack Sr. had been a young operative of the anti-British Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya, apparently spending some time in confinement getting tortured and beaten by British guards; over the years, he matured into a promising scholar and leader for the cause; he’d travelled to Honolulu on an international scholarship to study economics; Dunham at the time was an 18-year old freshman. The two married after a brief courtship, and soon afterwards Barack Jr. was born.

When the future bringer of “hope” and “change” was still having his diapers changed, Hussein the Elder (and Darker) flew the coop permanently, returning to his native country, where it turned out — contrary to what he’d originally told Ann — he’d long been married to a local woman. Yet Barry’s mother apparently never held this treachery, deceit, and desertion against her dusky paramour. Instead, in true guilty white liberal fashion, she praised him to the heavens as a great man who simply needed to fulfill his grand destiny. Barack Sr. would marry several more times, in keeping with (still current) African custom, and would only visit Ann and Barack Jr. on one other occasion in his life.

Obama Sr.’s early hopes to become a leader of the African independence movement were to fizzle badly. Smart but irascible, frustrated by thwarted ambition, bested by rivals and finally consigned to bureaucratic irrelevance, he grew into a dissipated, alcoholic, embittered middle age. His death in 1982, in a likely drunk driving accident, hit the future American president hard. At age 21, Barack Jr. duly attended the family patriarch’s funeral in Kenya; the writer of Dreams from My Father describes the emotional moment when he knelt beside his father’s grave, anguish welling up in his chest.

In 2016, D’Souza visits this historic spot and nods thoughtfully; he is quite sure that here is the place where young Barack’s formation as a thinker truly solidified. Here he vowed to take up his father’s cause and carry it forward.

“We are all shaped by our pasts,” our lilting-voiced guide portentously declares, “and we all carry elements of our past into the future.” And in the case of young, grief-stricken, father-haunted Obama, D’Souza finds this aphorism particularly apt.

* * *

2016 depicts D’Souza as an intrepid uncoverer of the psyche of the American president. To unearth his crucial discoveries, he travels the globe, making colorfully cinematic stops in Kenya, Indonesia, and Hawaii, while also paying visits to various well-heeled D.C.-based neocon thinktankers like Daniel Pipes and Shelby Steele. Of course, this entire setup is in some ways a risibly disingenuous charade, because D’Souza has already reached his conclusions, outlined in his 2010 book The Roots of Obama’s Rage, which he pretty much just repeats here.

Simply put, D’Souza contends that Obama was sorely wounded by his father’s nearly total absence from his life; to compensate for this loss and the concomitant sense of insecurity it brought, he chose to emulate his father’s politics out of a desire to win his posthumous approval.

According to 2016, Obama’s fraught father issues have numerous dire consequences for the immediate future, should he be allowed to serve a second term. After winning his second election, D’Souza explains, the president will no longer even have to pretend to be moderate or centrist. Instead, he will pursue his Third World socialist agenda — the one he shares with his once Soviet-sympathizing papa — full bore, pulling out all the stops, and then some. For Obama, it turns out, just aches to bring the country to its knees by spending it into paralyzing debt, while at the same time stripping it of its defenses and rendering it supine before a hostile world. Moreover, D’Souza tells us, the president wants to see to it that America’s enemies unite, consolidate, and grow steadily more powerful, while America grows weaker. During one luridly entertaining segment near the film’s conclusion, we are treated to an illustration of a map of the Middle East in which, thanks to Obama’s wily and treacherous anti-American machinations, we witness one regime after another falling to Muslim radicals, leaving a “United States of Islam” poised for confrontation with the West; the hostile turf of this new caliphate has turns a sickly Islamic green.

* * *

D’Souza’s grim final assertions are strictly conjectural at best. Oddly, in a sense they give Obama too much credit. The film treats him as a true believer of some sort of sinister cause, rather than as a canny and cynical politician, with infinitely malleable, barely-existent principles, which is surely much closer to the truth. How can we really know how Obama feels about his father or how it has affected him, besides what he has chosen to tell us, likely out of self-aggrandizing motivations?

Ultimately, 2016 probably won’t do much to persuade the undecided; the “clash of civilizations” rhetoric won’t be effective unless and until another “9/11” takes place. (Remember how ardently pre-9/11 neocons pined for a “new Pearl Harbor”?) Still, the movie makes for a somewhat entertaining and only slightly hokey bit of elaborate stealth-GOP agitprop; it is worth a look, merely for curiosity’s sake.

7 Comments

I saw the film recently. It was well made and did have a few new bits I hadn’t heard before, e.g. how BHO’s dusky dad had both legs amputated and how he later died, the ‘conservative’ politics of his black brother in Kenya, and his Indonesian stepfather’s right-wing sentiments and choices – which BHO’s communist white mother didn’t like for some reason!

I agree that the film is not going to do much to change the vote. The usual bloc voting groups (blacks, browns, homos, Jews, liberals and leftists, prison inmates, over half of white females, etc.) will go for BHO and the whites will split their vote as usual, ushering in BHO’s re-election. And of course each election cycle will see the blocs ever bigger for the Dems while the whites will remain just as stupid. The only voting group that still leans to the RP is that of white males – and even many of them are voting for BHO after ‘he’ took out OBL.

Really there is no reason why the dems can not keep a lock on the presidency from here onwards, as well an ever-growing dominance of Congress. That is simply how the demographics will surely play out. Of course once the additional estimated 50 million mexicans arrive… imagine how far the RP will have moved itself to the left in its amazing attempts to get black and brown votes.

I don’t think another 9/11 will change things either. Indeed it may just result in more calls for BHO-type ‘leadership’ friendly to Islam and the Turd World. Leave it to media and academics to spin things the way the DP wants them.

I would expect some Michael Moore type of film on Romney to come out as a counterbalance. Why not as yet, puzzles me, but we still have a couple more months before the election.

Great article, hit the nail on the head. As an aside, I think it is much more convincing that Obama’s father was Frank Marshall Davis. The evidence:
1) A greater resemblance between the 2, note the eyes particularly.
2) Davis’s interest and long-time contact with Obama as his mentor.
3) Obama’s oratorical gifts and charisma are more likely to have come from a reknowned poet and smooth-talker than from the stock of rather unremarkable Africans.
4) As noted by a previous poster, the light skin color. Mr. Davis was very light-skinned, suggesting perhaps half or more European genes. Obama is very light for being the child of a 100% African father (with skin that produces a ton of melanin).
5) Obama’s IQ is apparently around 140, and had his father been a 90-IQ African (putting him on the far right of the African bell-curve), his mother would have most likely needed to have an IQ way up there, possibly in the 170+ range (as IQs of offspring tend to roughly average out between parents).

A well-reasoned theory about the hiding/altering of birth certificates is that Davis was indicated on the original documents as the father. Perhaps this is gossipy, but its still an interesting detail to ponder.

About skin color, I know of a female child of a white woman and a very dark skinned black man – her skin is quite light for a mulatto. It depends on the genetics at conception.

As for Obama’s alleged IQ of 140, why does he need a teleprompter everytime he speaks? Even when he visited some school to talk to the kids or every press conference, the teleprompter is there. He can’t seem to speak his own mind without some teleprompter around. There has to be a good reason why he is called Teleprompter-in-Chief.

His basic premise of Obama as an Anti-Neo Colonist makes alot of sense and answers many questions – but other questions remain unasked and unanswered. Like who are Obama’s backers and what is their game.

Obama was made (their own words) by the Chicago jewish establishment:

One longtime Jewish observer of the political scene, who did not want to be identified, said admiringly that “Jews made him. Wherever you look, there is a Jewish presence.”

I found the movie self serving. D’Souza sets himself up as a competitor to Obama with America as the prize and Whites as mere chips in the game. He doesn’t say this of course and the racial angle is played down for obvious reasons. I see this as increasingly true – Whites are now becoming just pawns in other people’s fights.

I read the book as well: D’Souza comes straight out as a Globalist free market Neo Con with America as the policeman of the world. His basic premise of Obama as an Anti-Neo Colonist makes alot of sense and answers many questions – but other questions remain unasked and unanswered. Like who are Obama’s backers and what is their game.

Another question: was Obama’s African father his actual father? The offspring of pure blood Negroes and Whites are far more Negro looking than Obama. Frank Marshall Davis may be a better guess. We may never know. What we do know is that Obama is a mystery man with very powerful hands on him from early on – hands making the way forward smooth. Again, D’Souza says nothing about any of this.

I seldom ever go to a movie theater to see a movie anymore, but a friend of mine wanted to see this flick, so I made an exception. Initially, I was shocked to see the price of admission was $8 bucks – and then, once inside – I opted out of any food or snacks, after seeing a small box of popcorn priced at $6.00. I did get a cold drink, for which I had to shell out $5.75.

As I said, I’ve not been in a movie theater in a very long time – and I was immediately reminded of why I will continue to avoid these rip-joints in the future.

As for the movie, I can honestly say that there wasn’t much information in it that hasn’t already been available to the interested public, long before this Communist rat emerged from the Oval Office toilet bowl. The key is – to the interested public, which means for those who were willing to turn their TV off and use the web to research this guy’s life and history.

One thing that immediately jumped out at me – was the not-so-coincidental appearances of a number of these jewish neo-cons who were responsible for lying our nation into wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and now, half a dozen or more other Middle Eastern nations that the criminal state of Israel wants us to attack and destroy for them. I’m no fan of Obama – but, the neo-con fingerprints were all over this movie, folks. The one neo-con in the movie was spewing the standard neo-con jewish line about how Obama was a threat to the safety of the USA….and……Israel, too…….yea, sure thing, you conniving cockroach.

The flick was designed to reverse the white guilt brainwashing that led to so many whites voting for this loser, so they’d vote for Romney, and then the jews could get the USA dragged into a new war with Iran, which Obama has so far refused to give them.

Advice for White people: Learn to recognize when you’re being brainwashed, okay?